ARISTOTLE AND THE IMPORTANCE OF VIRTUE IN THE CONTEXT OF THE POLITICS AND THE NICOMACHEAN ETHICS AND ITS RELATION TO TODAY

Transcription

1 Bucknell University Bucknell Digital Commons Honor s Theses Student Theses ARISTOTLE AND THE IMPORTANCE OF VIRTUE IN THE CONTEXT OF THE POLITICS AND THE NICOMACHEAN ETHICS AND ITS RELATION TO TODAY Kyle Brandon Anthony Bucknell University Follow this and additional works at: Recommended Citation Anthony, Kyle Brandon, "ARISTOTLE AND THE IMPORTANCE OF VIRTUE IN THE CONTEXT OF THE POLITICS AND THE NICOMACHEAN ETHICS AND ITS RELATION TO TODAY" (2010). Honor s Theses. Paper 21. This Honors Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Theses at Bucknell Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honor s Theses by an authorized administrator of Bucknell Digital Commons. For more information, please contact dcadmin@bucknell.edu.

2

3 Table of Contents Introduction 1 Chapter 1 What does it mean to live a good life? 7 The virtuous life 8 Ethical virtue 13 Bravery as an ethical virtue 20 Justice 22 Chapter 2 The Politics and the ideal polis 28 Development of a polis 29 Features of an ideal polis 32 What does it mean to be a citizen of a polis? 40 Aristotle s views on education 42 Social groups in a polis who are not recognized as citizens 45 Non-ideal political systems 51 Chapter 3 Connections between the Politics and the Ethics 57 Chapter 4 Difficulties in applying Aristotle s theories to a modern setting 68 Conclusion Where do we go from here? 87 Bibliography 89

4 iv Acknowledgements First off, I have to thank God, as He helped me endure this project and gave me the courage to press on when I became frustrated, angry, and ready to quit. Secondly, I thank Professor Jeffrey Turner, who through his ideas in the classroom and during his office helped me to come up with this idea. I owe much to Hannah Kaizer, as she listened to me complain and helped me with much of the work that I completed. Alex Trunzo is another person I must thank, as she too listened to my woes and encouraged me to pursue the thesis. My roommate from freshman year, Clement Gyan, deserves a special recognition as well, as he kept up with the status of my thesis from the beginning. Jordan Donaldson comforted me after the defense as I was reworking some of the material, and for that I too must thank him as well. Finally, I must thank my mother and those who prayed for me while I struggled through this thesis, because without their support, I could not have finished my thesis.

5 v Abstract While much of Aristotle s works are preserved in various volumes, two of his famous works are the Nichmachean Ethics and the Politics, both of which contain a rich compilation of ethical and political thought. In the Ethics, Aristotle describes a thorough understanding of ethical and intellectual virtue. By pursuing these virtues, Aristotle argues that a person can achieve a life of fulfilling happiness. The ideal polis as described in the Politics serves as a place where the virtuous life is attained in the best manner. Citizens who pursue virtue make the polis better, and the rulers that guide the polis ensure that the citizens have every opportunity to pursue the virtuous life. In this thesis, I see how relevant Aristotle s theory is by laying out the basic principles of the Ethics and the Politics and the connections between the two works. In doing so, I found that Aristotle s ideal theory points out a significant flaw in our political system: the fact that we do not share a common moral conception such as the one concerned with the virtuous life as Aristotle proposes. This does not suggest that Aristotle s view was actualized during his time period, but that Aristotle conceives of an ideal life and an ideal polis that could be realized. Certainly there are issues with Aristotle s thesis concerning the inferiority of slaves and women. But what is more poignant is the impracticality of instituting a shared common conception when today s 1 political system permits various ideas about ethics and morality. 1 By today s society, I am really focusing on the United States, and will use that as a model throughout my entire thesis.

6 1 Introduction Before I begin to discuss the actual thesis, it is helpful to first have a brief understanding of Aristotle s background. It is said that Aristotle was a wealthy philosopher who devoted his entire life to reading and writing. He took a special interest in ethics and politics, hence why I chose to focus my thesis on two of his texts, the Nichomachean Ethics and the Politics. In addition, Aristotle, like most wealthy people of this ancient time period, had a prejudice against manual labor, and it is likely that this attitude influenced his philosophical and political thought. Another fact that affected his political thought is the traveling that Aristotle did; he traveled occasionally between Macedonia and Athens due to wars and the death of various kings, and his observations about various political systems are shown through the non-ideal political systems. At one point, Aristotle opened up a center for research called Lyceum where he taught, which explains why his texts are written in a lecture style. Both the Ethics and the Politics are works that include his translated lectures, so some ideas are reiterated throughout various chapters of both books. Because Aristotle taught in Athens and spent a good amount of time in Macedonia, it is probable that the rise of the Macedonians during this time period affected Aristotle s political philosophy. The political frame of Aristotle s life does provide a historical background to his work, but most critics agree that the politics this time did not influence his political philosophy because Aristotle does not reference the rise of Macedonian power or the threat it posed to Athens. 2 2 The information in this paragraph can be found on pages 6-9 of Kraut s Aristotle.

7 2 One of the reasons Aristotle is such an important figure is because he was one of the first philosophers to note and describe differences between the topics of ethics and politics. Prior to Aristotle, ethics and politics were thought to be very closely related, so distinguishing the texts was certainly an innovative move. While Aristotle does recognize that ethics and politics are distinctive of each other, he maintains both texts should be analyzed because their themes support each other. We will see this in more detail in the thesis itself, especially in chapter 3, a chapter in which I connect various ideas between the Ethics and the Politics. On the topic of the Ethics and the Politics, there are two points to note about these texts. First, there is some debate about when these two texts were written. It seems as though most of the Politics was written before the Ethics was completed because the closing sentences of the Ethics suggest that some parts of the Politics had already been drafted (Kraut 17). 3 There is another work that has strong similarities (some argue it is a rougher version of the Ethics itself) to the Ethics that is not included in this discussion the Eudemian Ethics. They cover much of the same topics, but Kraut highlights an astonishing fact about the Eudemian Ethics: the work does not highlight or enhance Aristotle s political thought. Further, the Nicomachean Ethics seems to demonstrate a 3 The closing lines of the Ethics: First, then, let us try to go over those parts which have been stated well by our predecessors, then from the constitutions we have collected let us investigate what kinds of things tend to preserve or destroy the states or each of the forms of government and why some states are well while others are badly administered; for, having investigated these matters, perhaps we would also be in a better position to perceive what form of government is best, how each form of government should be ordered, and what laws and customs each should use. So let us start to discuss these (1181b16-25). These lines indicate strongly the developing thesis or one of the goals of the Politics which at that point was safe to assume that some of it had already been written.

8 3 greater understanding and depth of ethical discussion in contrast to the Eudemian Ethics (Kraut 18-19). Thus I only refer to the Nicomachean Ethics and the Politics when comparing the two works. Furthermore, I assume that Kraut is correct in stating that most of the Politics was written before the Ethics. Second, most of the Politics was actually written before the Nicomachean Ethics, so it is possible that some of the themes in the Ethics may not correlate with the Politics. Now that I have explained the purpose behind choosing these texts, I turn to the structure of the thesis itself and the significance of this comparison. In short, I argue that Aristotle s conception of the ideal virtuous life and his views on the ideal polis are important themes that, to a certain extent, should continue to be important to today s society. In chapter 1, I discuss Aristotle s Ethics and how he describes the virtuous life. Aristotle sees virtue in two different categories: ethical and intellectual virtue, both of which are essential to living a virtuous life. Further, I explain the ethical virtue of bravery in order to provide an example of how Aristotle articulates each of the virtues. After this, I hone in on justice, and there are two types: justice as complete virtue and justice with respect to proportion. These ideas are vital to the virtuous life because without the pursuit of virtue, happiness cannot be attained. However, Aristotle approaches this view with an ideal mindset; in no way is his model one that occurred during his time period, rather he observes people in order to imagine what the best possible life looks like using the best examples. In the second chapter, I focus on the Politics, where Aristotle devotes much of his energy in describing the ideal polis. Before I discuss Aristotle s conception of the ideal

9 4 polis, I focus on the development of a polis and how it begins with a small household association and its transgression that could emerge into a polis. Once this has been established, I talk about the features of an ideal polis. Within that description I bring up the role of the citizen and the ruler in the ideal polis and discuss what kind of lives these groups should lead. However, not all people who live in a polis are called a citizen, which leads me to my next point. Aristotle does not include slaves, women, farmers, and artisans as citizens of an ideal polis. Aristotle suggests that these groups are essential to the idea polis, yet they as individuals are not regarded as citizens because of various flaws. Finally, I end this chapter talking about some political systems that are not the most ideal. Aristotle believes that rulers must understand the different kinds of political systems because the knowledge gained from examining these systems enables the rulers to better resolve any issues that arise within the polis. In the third chapter, I focus on three crucial connections between the Ethics and the Politics. Virtue is a fundamental component in both texts, so I draw this out more fully in this chapter. In the Ethics, the idea of virtue provides people with practical actions that they can pursue in trying to achieve the virtuous life. Virtue is essential to the polis as well; since the aim of the polis is to make its citizens better, the citizens must know how to achieve this. Virtue as described in the Ethics provides a foundation upon which the Politics is built. 4 Also within both texts is the non-citizen aspect. As mentioned before, the Politics is explicit about what constitutes a citizen. The Ethics provides 4 Here I am arguing that the principles of the Ethics serve as a foundation for how the Politics functions, not necessarily the temporal (or the fact that the Politics was written before the Ethics).

10 5 support for this view because Aristotle talks about the varieties of friendship. In this sense, the Ethics details how people ought to be treated, and the polis provides not only a place in which these friendships are enacted, but the roles that people play within the polis. Finally, I discuss the importance of ruling. The Politics contains much information about how a person ought to rule and the different types of ruling there are. The purpose of the Ethics is to provide the ruler with the virtues essential to carrying out that task and to push the rest of the polis in striving toward the virtuous life. In chapter four, I raise a number of objections that question whether or not Aristotle s conception of ethics and politics relates to a modern society. In this section I focus on MacIntyre s emotivism argument. MacIntyre believes that our society does not share a common moral language. Instead, we make moral judgments based upon our own feelings, attitudes, emotions, and the like. Since we appeal to our own moral sphere, we cannot rationally engage in moral debate with each other; thus we talk past one another. MacIntyre recognizes this as a disconnection that needs to be addressed, and he believes that we can completely overcome our emotive state if we get rid of our current political association. Today s current political system, at least in the United States, praises the diverse number of institutions that have different types of moral backgrounds. Our political system opposes the idyllic Aristotelian life of virtue and happiness that people share, which is why the Aristotelian view does not fit into our modern society. Due to the unlikelihood of the Aristotelian model replacing the present political system, MacIntyre concludes that we will not attain such a common moral conception. Another concern that is raised against Aristotle s theory is his treatment of the non-ideal citizens. While slavery

11 6 still exists today, it is not tolerated, as there are many efforts to raise this awareness and to combat this wrongdoing. Along similar lines, I will also examine the role of women, farmers and artisans as well. Finally, I conclude the chapter by questioning whether or not it is important to pursue the virtues as intensely as Aristotle describes. As citizens of the polis, is it necessary for them to put so much effort into the pursuit of the virtuous life such that we, as citizens, require slaves so that we have more time to achieve this goal? I do not think that it is entirely necessary to see it exactly the way that Aristotle does, and I will develop this idea more thoroughly in this chapter. I conclude by arguing that Aristotle s overall conception of the best life possible in a polis does give us enough to claim that we should still retain some of his philosophical and political thought in today s society. I also stress the importance of education as a means that could lead to the creation of a common moral language that everyone could learn and use such as MacIntyre describes in his argument.

12 7 Chapter 1 What does it mean to live a good life? In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle posits an answer to the question of how to live the best life. In a modern day context, a typical answer to living a good life is found in the American Dream : a big house in the suburbs with a front and backyard, two point five kids, two cars, a white picket fence, etc. According to Aristotle, few people will be able to articulate the steps that lead to the achievement of that dream. He posits that all aim at some good and seek what is lacking, and yet they leave out the knowledge of it (Ethics, 1097a5-6). This is what makes Aristotle such an important figure to study because he gives us the knowledge of how to live the best life possible. It may not always end with the achievement of the American Dream, but following Aristotle s advice by pursuing a virtuous life will likely improve the well-being of any given individual. In this chapter, I examine how Aristotle defines goods and how the pursuit of these goods leads to virtue. Then I discuss virtue and the differences between ethical and intellectual virtue, how they are related, and how they affect the pursuit of a virtuous life. Then I look at justice, the virtue that Aristotle acknowledges as the most complete virtue. Finally, I show how Aristotle uses justice as a proportion and as a complete virtue and its significance to the virtuous life. Aristotle uses these ideas as a foundation for people should they desire to choose the best life possible. The most remarkable aspect about

13 8 Aristotle s articulation of the virtuous life is that he imagines one that can actually be realized. 5 The virtuous life The pursuit of the good life begins with categorizing kinds of goods. According to Aristotle, there are three types of goods: external, such as friends and wealth; bodily, or the beauty, health, and strength of an individual; and those concerning the soul, which includes virtue (Ethics, 1098b13-16). Activities that are done with accordance to the soul are the most important and are goods in the highest sense and actions and mental activities are associated with the soul as well (Ethics, 1098b15-16). In this regard, activities of the soul are the highest goods, but what does that mean? Before we tackle this idea, we must understand that these activities must be performed according to reason (Ethics, 1102b32-33). Reason comes in two senses: that which has reason in itself, this being the principle sense, and that which listens to reason, like a child listening to a father (Ethics, 1109a3-4). Aristotle combines both the virtuous activity and reason by introducing the distinction between a lyre player and a good lyre player. A good lyre player plays well because he plays nobly and in accordance with how a lyre sounds (Ethics, 1098a11-15). In other words, a good lyre player plays the right notes in a rhythm, tone, and pace that is correct. On the other hand, the lyre player achieves this by using reason during the activity; the lyre player thinks about how to pluck the correct strings at 5 In reading this thesis, please bear in mind that Aristotle does not articulate the idea of a virtuous life in the sense that it occurred during his lifetime. Aristotle observes the world around him, makes observations, and hypothesizes what sorts of things will lead a person to live the best life possible. Thus Aristotle s conception is both an ideal one but also one that has the capability to be realized.

14 9 the right times and in the right sequence (Ethics, 1098a7-8). This picture is analogous to the person who strives to live the virtuous life. The person must practice virtues until the virtues develop into habits; 6 this is the function of humankind (Ethics, 1098a10-12). Hence this explains why Aristotle believes that a person should pursue the activity of the soul according to virtue, and if the virtues are many, then according to the best and most complete virtue. And we should add in a complete life (Ethics, 1098a16-19). At this point, we understand that virtues are actions associated with the soul and practicing and honing these actions will lead us to the highest good. But is it necessary to pursue the highest good? External goods such as wealth, friends, strength, and beauty are definitely extolled through the media. These trends include luxurious but economical cars, beauty, going to college, health, proper dieting, among many other ones. 7 These are certainly important points; however, Aristotle believes that we ought to pursue the highest good because it is the most complete one (Ethics, 1097a26-30). What he means to say is that we should seek a good for the sake of itself and not to use it to gain some other good. For instance, imagine that beauty is the highest good that we pursue. Can that be an ultimate realistic goal in Aristotle s conception? Does beauty serve other purposes? It can attract others which could lead to marriage, so beauty could be used to find love. Beauty may help to secure a modeling job. Aristotle would contend that this good should not be pursued only for itself and not for 6 This idea mostly applies to ethical virtue, not intellectual virtue, as noted by the word habit. See further on for more explanation about the definition of ethical virtue. 7 This is a broad overview, mostly about the society of the United States. Certainly these trends do not apply in all cases.

15 10 the sake of something else, but that does not devalue beauty; it is simply not the most sought after good. From these instances we can see that beauty is probably not the most complete good because it is not pursued for its own sake, but for the sake of other things. In other words, the external goods are not the best goods to pursue; virtue is, and Aristotle reasons that clearly, then, virtue, according to these, is superior to the other goods (Ethics, 1095b30-31). So instead of pursuing the external goods, Aristotle argues that we should focus on the Greek concept of eudaimonia, which in English translates roughly as happiness 8 (Ethics, 357). It is crucial to understand the definition of eudaimonia, for eu means well and daimon means divinity or spirit, which indicates that the person lives in accordance with some kind of divinity (Kraut, 53fn4). This definition demonstrates that this happiness is more than just a temporal feeling. Rosalind Hursthouse echoes this definition as she sees Aristotle s conception of happiness as more than just living in a fool s paradise, or engaged in what we know is pointless activity (Hursthouse 10). Hursthouse sees this conception of happiness as only possible for rational beings, or humans (Hursthouse 9). 9 Hence this type of happiness is a more developed and more fulfilling sense of happiness. Aristotle believes that is the case because he says that happiness is something perfect and self-sufficient, and it is the end of things we do (Ethics, 1097b20-21). Unlike wealth, beauty, strength, or any of those other mentioned 8 I will use happiness throughout the rest of this paper, using the definition that Aristotle gives unless otherwise noted. 9 By rational beings, I take Hursthouse to mean that this type of happiness is only capable for human beings, since they are the ones who have the ability to reason.

16 11 ideas, happiness is pursued for its own sake and not to obtain something else. This is why Aristotle concludes that the ultimate end we seek in pursuing the virtuous life is to have a fulfilling happiness, and the virtues are actions that we take in order to attain happiness. By engaging in virtue, we also partake in happiness. How does one pursue complete happiness? Aristotle says that for happiness requires [ ] both complete virtue and a complete life (Ethics, 1100a4-5). In other words, one cannot attain happiness by remaining idle, but through action. Virtue ties into the makeup of the best and most complete life as well because virtues are purposeful actions. Aristotle also mentions that a person who pursues virtue should always be engaged always or most of all in actions and studies of things done according to virtue (Ethics, 1100b19-20). Aristotle defines virtue in association with the soul, for it is of the soul, too, that happiness is stated by us to be an activity (Ethics, 1102a16-18). Therefore if we want to participate in happiness, we involve ourselves in virtuous actions. According to Aristotle, there are two different categories of virtues: intellectual and ethical. Intellectual virtues (wisdom, intelligence, prudence, etc.) are those that [originate] and [grow] mostly by teaching (Ethics, 1103a5; a14-15). In this category of virtues, it is required that a person teach these virtues, for they are learned only through that medium which one learns through education. On the other hand, ethical virtues (generosity, temperance, etc.) cannot be taught to a person but are attained by habituation (Ethics, 1103a20-1). Aristotle displays this ability to acquire habits by learning how Aristotle learned them: by observing and documenting at other people who resemble such an ethical virtue. Consequently, if a person wants to learn how to be brave, the person

17 12 observes the actions of a brave person. To deepen this definition, Aristotle claims that ethical virtue is a habit, disposed toward action by deliberate choice, being at the mean relative to us, and defined by reason and as a prudent man would define it (Ethics, 1106b a2). These virtues are not inherent; we have the capacity to pursue them. Still, we need to practice these virtues in order to transform them into habitual dispositions that we possess all the time and use when necessary. For instance, parents can teach their children what generosity means and demonstrate how to carry out the virtue, but if the child does not listen and practice being generous, the child will not acquire the virtue. Once the child practices the virtue enough and acquires the habit, the child no longer has to constantly use the virtue at every moment in order to possess an ethical virtue the habit remains within the child. 10 Although we are not born with virtues, we have the capacity to accept and perfect virtues within our lives in order to achieve the best life (Ethics, 1103a24-6). Aristotle believes that we have the power to make our own choices insofar as doing what is right or wrong is concerned; in other words, to do evil is a voluntary act of will (Ethics, 1113b10-16). The same format applies to society and the law. If a person commits an evil act, that offender will be punished by the legislators 11, but if a person 10 I say this not to mean the child never has to practice that virtue ever again. I say this to mean that the child never has to practice that virtue again surely Aristotle would not agree with that either. What I mean is that an individual does not have to practice the virtue at every single moment of one s life in order to maintain it. 11 Unless these [actions] are done by force or through ignorance caused not by the doers themselves (Ethics, 1113b34-25). It is also important to point out that not all actions are punishable by law here I am focusing on actions that are.

18 13 performs a noble action, such as returning a lost wallet, the person will likely be honored or rewarded (Ethics, 1113b23-26). A counterargument that undercuts this idea is that a person could be inebriated while the person commits an evil act. Aristotle rebuts this claim when he says that a person has the power of avoiding drunkenness, which is the cause of his ignorance while drunk (Ethics, 1113b33-34). To strengthen this quotation, ignorance of the law is also not a reasonable excuse to commit an evil act, for men are punished also for being ignorant of certain legal matters which are not difficult to learn and should be known (Ethics, 1113b a1). Therefore the actions that we take determine the type of person we are, so next I take a closer look at the type of actions that people take, namely through ethical virtue. Ethical virtue Aristotle defines ethical virtue as a habit, disposed toward action by deliberate choice, being at the mean relative to us, and defined by reason and as a prudent man would define it (Ethics, 1106b a2). Recall that habits are learned only through the deliberate practicing of them, so once ethical virtues are acquired, they become dispositions that are possessed at all times. Ethical virtues are means between deficiency and excess, or vices. Aristotle warns that we should avoid these vices and focus on the mean, or virtue, which is such as right reason declares it to be (Ethics, 1138b18-20; Ethics, 1104a11-13; a26-7). But it is important to recognize that Aristotle says mean relative to us, so there is no precise mean that people should follow. Aristotle gives a clearer picture of what this looks like by using the example of a trainer working with athletes. He hypothesizes that if ten pounds of food for an athlete is too much and two

19 14 pounds for the same athlete is too few, then the mean would be six. But this same formula does not apply to a trainer s coaching methods consistently across a range of athletes. Ten pounds could be too much for one particular athlete but the right amount for one that needs more food in his diet. Recall that ethical virtue is defined by reason and as a prudent person would define it, so we must explore what Aristotle means by a prudent person. By Aristotle s definition, virtue is part of the soul (Ethics, 1099a13-15, 22-23), 12 so Aristotle introduces the discussion about the intellectual virtues through the examination of prudence. 13 For Aristotle, a prudent person is thought to be one who is able to deliberate well concerning what is good and expedient for [the person and the kinds of things which are good and expedient for living well (Ethics, 1140a26-28). A person who demonstrates prudence possesses the ability to distinguish what is good and bad for the person to live well. Aristotle believes that deliberation comes from the estimative part of the soul which has reason (Ethics, 1139a15), so in order to deliberate well, reason must guide it. It is here that Aristotle sums up ethical virtue and reason: since ethical virtue is a habit through intention while intention is desire through deliberation, reason should, because of these, be true and desire should be right, if indeed intention is to be good, and what reason asserts desire should pursue (Ethics, 1139a22-26). As mentioned before, in order to live the best life, reason must be associated with ethical virtues, which means that 12 This quotation does not state explicitly that virtue and the soul are connected. However, it does say that noble things are pleasant and that they too are actions according to virtue. These actions are also in the highest degree (23), and it was discussed earlier that the most important goods in the highest sense (1098b15) are actions of the soul. By this logic, virtues are associated with the soul. 13 In the glossary found in the back of the Ethics, prudence means a disposition by means of which one can deliberate truly concerning one s conduct for a good life (360).

20 15 actions must also be under the guidance of reason as well. These deliberate actions are chosen by the person voluntarily, or with intention. What does Aristotle mean when he mentions intention and deliberation, both of which are ambiguous terms? It is helpful to understand that intention connects to the idea of ethical virtue since ethical virtue is a habit through intention while intention is desire through deliberation (Ethics, 1139a23-24). It is already known that ethical virtues are practiced habits and that these habits develop through intention, but how? Intention is a source of motion (Ethics, 1139a31) that is, it is similar to thought in that it does not create movement but that it provides a foundation for the sake of something (Ethics, 1139a37). So far we know that ethical virtue occurs when the person has the thought or idea of it plus the desire through deliberation. Moreover, we can deliberate about the things which he can do by himself [ ] things which are possible [ ] whose outcome is not clear [ ] which there is something indeterminate (Ethics, 1112a35-b9-10). Here Aristotle hones in on the objects or phenomena that we try to solve. One idea about which we can deliberate is what Aristotle calls gymnastics, a term that most nearly means athletics in a modern context. Imagine that in today s society there is a coach and a high school track and field athlete who intends to become a triple jumper with the ultimate goal of competing at the state meet. The coach must deliberate, or think through various ways in which the coach can help the athlete realizes these goals. The coach puts the athlete through a conditioning program which includes running, abdominal, and strength exercises to get the athlete into shape. The athlete pursues this for a period of time and then the coach sees how the athlete responds. If the athlete is not

21 16 getting into shape or if the athlete continues to get hurt, the coach must try and find another way to help the athlete reach the goals. If the training works, then the coach can move to more advanced skill-based training. The coach uses various drills to try to get the athlete faster, to become more attune with the body, and to understand how to triple jump correctly. If the drills work, then the coach continues to use them. However, if the athlete cannot perform them, the coach must find other ways to help the athlete carry out these drills effectively. During this time, the coach takes the athlete to various competitions to see how the athlete performs in response to the training. The coach evaluates the athlete and then deliberates about how to get the athlete to improve areas that need improvement so that the athlete performs better. This example shows how deliberation is used to think through events whose outcome is not certain. The deliberation shows through in the coach s ability to change workouts that best fit the athlete. Intention is necessary because it is that source of motion that motivates a person to take action. Merging all of these concepts together, we see that Aristotle defines ethical virtue (bravery, e.g.) as a habit (a carried out action) through intention (a thought that provides the foundation or reason for motion) while intention is desire through deliberation (thinking through various techniques to determine a reasonable conclusion). Aristotle s claim that a soldier demonstrates bravery in a war situation helps to illustrate this idea (Ethics, 1115a25-35). A brave soldier knows that a person can die at any point in battle, but the soldier enters battle looking past that fear. However, a brave soldier does not just charge recklessly into battle because doing so would certainly lead to an instant kill. Instead, the brave soldier kills people tactfully by picking people off nearby and waiting

22 17 to see if it is safe to move to the next location. In this sense, the brave soldier already possesses the intent to go into battle and deliberates about the best way to kill people while still holding on to the soldier s life. If this is the case, then does it follow that ethical virtue is likewise a debatable topic of interest? It must be the case because like the athlete and the soldier, there is no single training regime or battle tactic that fits every single person. But for Aristotle, ethical virtue must be defined by reason and as a prudent man would define it (Ethics, 1107a1-2). Recall that prudence relates to the intellectual virtues when you consider how Aristotle discusses the general overview of what makes a prudent person: a prudent man is thought to be one who is able to deliberate well concerning what is good and expedient for himself [ ] the kinds of things which are good expedient for living well [in general] (Ethics, 1140a26-28). Aristotle highlights the importance of the prudent person s ability to recognize and discern the things, or virtues, that are good for that person. Virtues are not ends; they are means to an end that lead to the highest, most complete good (Ethics, 1097a28-30). In essence, virtues serve as the kinds of goods that help a person live a good life, and a prudent person knows what means are best and expedient for the person to follow. This is why a prudent person possesses the ability to define ethical virtue. However, there is some confusion with respect to what Aristotle says about prudence. He mentions twice that prudence concerns one s self (Ethics, 1140a26; 40b10), but he seems to counter those claims when he writes that prudence, then, must be a disposition with true reason and ability for actions concerning human goods (Ethics,

23 b21). The text implies that a person who enacts prudence is not solely concerned with the goods for the self, but also the goods for other people. And this is exactly what Aristotle means: Aristotle believes that prudence is concerned with both goods for the self and for others. This is shown through the point Aristotle makes about Pericles, a prudent man, who has the ability to perceive what is good for [himself and people like him] as well as for other men (Ethics, 1140b9-10). Aristotle argues that prudence relates to the ideas of ethical and intellectual virtues. Looking back to the original definition of ethical virtue, we see that the prudent person deliberates about the things that pertain only to that prudent person. But the prudent person does not give a concrete or particular list of what qualifies as prudence and what does not. Instead, the prudent person articulates a broad range, or a universal concept, of what is good for humans, and that is where the ethical virtues become important. The prudent person lists those virtues, such as bravery, generosity, temperance, high-mindedness, etc. But prudence is also a disposition with true reason and ability for actions concerning human goods (Ethics, 1140b21-22), and since all virtues are considered good and helpful in leading the best life, intellectual virtues associate with the ideas of prudence as well. This passage is a general overview because Aristotle does not state any specific guidelines. While the universal conception might be helpful to understand this picture, Aristotle warns against only knowing the universal. He demonstrates this issue by example, saying that if a man knew universally that light meats are digestible and healthy but did not know what kinds of meats are light, he would not produce health, but

24 19 a man who knows that chicken is light and healthy is more likely to produce health (Ethics, 1141b18-21). Knowing both the particulars and the universals enables a person to know more about health, and the same logic applies to the virtues as well. If a person knew that living a virtuous life is the best life to live but did not know how to live according to bravery or generosity, then the person would be unable to live a virtuous life. It would be better for any given person to know how to be generous, when to demonstrate bravery, what level of temperance is acceptable, and so on. For Aristotle, one particular moment or one particular action does not define a person; it is the acquired disposition of the virtues that determines the virtuousness of a person s life. Both ethical and intellectual virtues take time and experience to develop (Ethics, 1103a16-18). To strengthen this point, Aristotle uses an analogy to help us understand the reasoning behind the length of time: for one swallow does not make a spring, nor does one day; and so too one day or a short time does not make a man blessed or happy (Ethics, 1098a19-20). According to Aristotle, it is also impossible to claim that the person lived a happy and fulfilling virtuous life having never demonstrated a single virtue. Therefore, when Aristotle discusses prudence and the particulars that become familiar from experience, he is skeptical of youth because a young man is not experienced, for experience requires much time (Ethics, 1142a15-16). Continuing with Aristotle s train of thought, young people do not have time to be taught the intellectual virtues of prudence or intelligence nor can they acquire the ethical habits of temperance and generosity (Ethics, 1103a14-15; a19-21). In order to do so, people must do what Aristotle does throughout all of his work: look to people whom we see as brave,

25 20 temperate, generous, high-minded, etc., and to know ourselves well enough to say I am a little less courageous in some areas and I am a little more generous in others. In order to see how ethical virtues apply more practically, let us take a look at how Aristotle conceives of the virtue of bravery. Bravery as an ethical virtue Aristotle sees bravery as a mean between cowardice and rashness but what does this mean? A deficient amount of bravery results in cowardice, but an excess of bravery makes a person rash (Ethics, 1107b1-4). But what does Aristotle really mean when he says that someone demonstrates the virtue of bravery? Aristotle sums up the discussion of what it means to be a brave person when he says that he who faces and fears those fearful things which he should, and for the right cause and in the right manner and at the right time, and who shows bravery in a similar manner, is a brave man (Ethics, 1115b16-20). For instance, a brave person ought not to fear poverty, disease, or anything in that category that is not in the person s power to control (Ethics, 1115a18-19). This seems on target because if a person becomes too consumed with worry over the uncontrollable, e.g. the fear that a life-threatening disease would strike, living a good life would be difficult. On the other hand, Aristotle maintains that it is noble to fear a bad reputation - in fact, if people do not fear this then Aristotle calls them disgraceful, for he who fears this is a good man and has a sense of shame, while he who does not is shameless (Ethics, 1115a13-15). Aristotle builds on the concept of fearing the right things, but what does that mean? Aristotle maintains that [the brave man] will fear even

26 21 such terrible things, but as he should and as reason follows, for the sake of what is noble; for this is the end of virtue (Ethics, 1115b11-13). Reason allows a person to pursue virtue in the right manner. For Aristotle, there is no one thing that makes one person brave over another because what is fearful is not the same for all men (Ethics, 1115b7). What matters most is that reason is associated with ethical virtue, and without reason guiding virtuous actions, achieving happiness would not be possible. Assuming that Aristotle is right about death being the most fearful thing known to man, he argues that it is reasonable to fear death in certain circumstances, such as times of war, since the perils here are the greatest and noblest (Ethics, 1115a28-32). By the same token, he calls a person brave if [the person] is fearless in facing a noble death or in facing emergencies in which death is close at hand (Ethics, 1115a33-35). Certainly the person cannot charge into battle recklessly without reason because that person would die. Not only would that be a bad decision, but it would seem to be what Aristotle defines as a rash person. However, Aristotle defines a rash man who is thought [ ] to be boastful and a pretender to bravery (Ethics, 1115b29-30), or a person who has the appearance of being brave but does not carry out any brave actions. Likewise, the person cannot fear death to the point where the person becomes a coward, which is the deficiency of bravery. A coward fears the things he should not, and in the manner he should not [ ] and he is also deficient in courage [ ] for he is afraid of everything (Ethics, 1115b a1; a3). If the person were to fear the wrong things, then it is certain that the person s fear of death would paralyze the person in battle, thus being ineffectual and taking no action or the wrong actions. Aristotle wants the brave

27 22 person to avoid the vice of cowardice because a coward fears things that should not be feared. For instance, Aristotle considers war as the noblest occasion to demonstrate virtue. A coward might fear something much more disgraceful, such as death by consuming too much alcohol. Not only is alcohol intoxication a disgraceful act, but it is also within our power to choose to imbibe alcohol (Ethics, 1113b6-8). We can choose to demonstrate bravery in battle as well; in order to demonstrate this action, we must have already acquired the habit of bravery. Aristotle emphasizes this theme throughout his work: there is a right manner, or right reason, for a person to exude courage and fear; and when the action is done according to right reason, it is virtuous. When actions are not performed in accordance with virtue and reason, it results in a vice. This is how Aristotle presents the rest of the ethical virtues; he discusses the virtue, its two vices, and details actions that people take that put them somewhere along the spectrum of deficiency, mean, and excess, with the mean being sought after. Those who perform these virtues according to right reason will maintain the right kind of happiness. Justice Now that we have talked about the importance of virtue from an ethical standpoint, it is crucial to examine what Aristotle considers as the best and most complete virtue justice. There are two different types of justice: justice as a complete virtue, and justice with respect to proportion. Aristotle takes a slightly different approach in defining justice as a complete virtue by talking about it in terms of its contrary injustice. The unjust person is more or less the lawbreaker [ ] the grasping or unfair man, while the

28 23 just person is the law-abiding man or the fair man (Ethics, 1129a33-35; 29b1-2). Laws are made for the common good of the community with respect to virtue or with respect to some other such thing [e.g., honor]; so in one way we call just those things which produce or preserve happiness or its parts in a political community (Ethics, 1129b14-19). 14 Aristotle demonstrates that one way to see law is through the connection between virtue and living a good life and the law. If breaking the law results in injustice, then laws must be just (Ethics, 1129b12). Since virtue is a part of the law, and breaking the law results in injustice, then the law orders us to perform the actions of a brave man (e.g., not to desert our post, nor to take flight, nor throw away our arms) [ ] and similarly with respect to the other virtues and evil habits, commanding us to do certain things and forbidding us to do others; and it does so rightly if it is rightly framed, but less well if hastily framed (Ethics, 1129b20-21; 24-26). The law demands that its citizens perform the actions of a brave person, and in order to carry out brave actions, the citizens must possess the habit of bravery. If a person neglects these actions, the result is injustice. Not only is it an act of injustice to forego the acquisition of virtues, but it is unlawful; therefore we have a lawful obligation toward the rest of the people in a given society. The law demands that citizens meet minimal standards of character (Kraut 395) which signifies that citizens should possess some kind of virtue, because those who possess virtues demonstrate good character. True virtue can only be demonstrated toward another person. Hence it is important for citizens to have virtues because [in the best state] the 14 I will leave the political community alone for now because that is a topic that Aristotle addresses in the Politics; hence it is better fit for that idea to be discussed in the following chapter.

29 24 virtue of a citizen and of a ruler is the same as that of the best man [ and] the task of a law giver would be (a) to see that men become good (Politics, 1333a12-15). If the concepts just and fair serve as means, where does that leave injustice? Aristotle considers injustice both a deficiency and an excess. Injustice is an excess of what is beneficial without qualification and it is a deficiency of what is harmful (Ethics, 1134a9-12). The term without qualification is a confusing term which needs elaboration, and to demonstrate this, I use the following example. Imagine that there is a boss who has two employees working for him. One employee receives less than the other one yet they both put in an equal amount of work. If the two workers did not have any other outstanding credentials perhaps one worked for more years and thus deserves a higher pay or one received a bonus for acquiring more clients then the employee who received more for less gained that extra money without qualification, or obtained it without a logical reason. A deficiency of what is harmful may occur if the boss of the employees decides to cut drastically one of the employees pay for no good reason so that he could not afford to sustain his life. To show how unjust this action is, imagine that the company grosses more than enough to allow everyone to have a luxurious salary. This example illustrates some serious wrongdoings because it affects people in a negative and undeserved way. Recall that law and virtue is related; since the law is a branch of justice, people commit an injustice as well. But this kind of justice is complete virtue because it includes all of them, so committing an injustice is much worse than neglecting one virtue. Still within the context of justice as a complete virtue, Aristotle praises the just person who acts for what is expedient for someone else, whether for a ruler or a

30 25 member of the community (Ethics, 1130a5-7). Justice is a virtue that always impacts others. On the other hand, the worst kind of person is one whose evil habit affects both himself and his friends (Ethics, 1130a7-8). In Aristotle s conception, neglecting or committing injustices over a span of a lifetime leads to one to become an evil person. Aristotle keys in on two conceptions of justice: proportional justice and complete justice. Proportional justice, or a justice based on equal geometrical proportions, and corrective justice, which contains a judge who restores the balance of proportions when it is disrupted. Proportional justice depends on four things; for the persons to which it happens to be just are [at least] two and the things are distributed into [at least] two parts (Ethics, 1131a19-21). This logic applies to the equal as well, based on the idea of proportions. The commentary at the back of the Ethics provides an example of the kind of proportion that Aristotle acknowledges: For example, 5 is greater than 3 but less than 8, and it is also equal to the sum of 3 and 2. Now in transactions, what is given may be of greater value or of less value than what is received. Hence it is possible for what is given to be equal in value to what is received [ ] fairness is a species or an application of equality. Evidently, just as the equal lies between the greater and the less, so the fair lies between what is unfair in excess and what is unfair in deficiency (Ethics, 262). This equality becomes an important component with respect to the mean of fairness and how it is distributed; if the parts are not divided equally, quarrels and accusations arise and this occurs when the equality of ratios is not adhered to (Ethics, 1131a24; 32).